site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6d ago (text post)   22648 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 13, 2026

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I just don’t understand this one. The democrats have never cared about “blasphemy” in any form, in fact they quite often (especially with regard to Christianity) celebrate “transgressive” art that is often by it’s nature blasphemy against Christianity. The democrats defended the film “Last Temptation of Christ” that depicted Christ as struggling with homosexuality, they defended an art display that was literally a crucifix in a jar of urine. This only makes sense if the people using this incident are doing a pretty classic KTO-KEGO. If this were anyone other than Trump, no one would be talking about it.

Kto indeed. You are conflating several different groups.

The presidential twitter has more reach than any shock artist. I think you’ll find that most of the people complaining never said anything about Piss Christ at all.

Nitpick: it's "kto kogo"

Further nitpick: despite that being how it’s written in Cyrillic, in modern Russian it is pronounced something like “kto kavo”

The democrats have never cared about “blasphemy” in any form

Of course not and they still don't, this is all arguments-as-soldiers. They couldn't possibly care less but it's a "fun" excuse to get Trump's supporters to complain about him.

The democrats defended the film “Last Temptation of Christ” that depicted Christ as struggling with homosexuality

Possibly thinking of the play Corpus Christi or one of the other works. I could've sworn there was another movie by an Italian director but I can't find it on wikipedia.

The democrats have never cared about “blasphemy” in any form, in fact they quite often (especially with regard to Christianity) celebrate “transgressive” art that is often by it’s nature blasphemy against Christianity.

"Blasphemy"'s a wide category and is not amazingly helpful toward understanding this.

SJers generally celebrate things that denigrate or subvert Christianity, like the aforementioned Piss Christ and like depicting Jesus as black. Arrogantly claiming to be Jesus (at least without obvious subversion as well) implies that being Jesus is a good thing, which is not in accord with the SJ narrative. It's not the worst thing in the world by their standards, but AIUI they generally consider it negative from an ideological point of view.

There is nothing wrong with depicting Jesus as black; outside of the art of iconography(which has very specific conventions and rules), His appearance is completely arbitrary.

Depicting Him as George Floyd is idolatrous, blasphemous, and heretical, sure. But if African Americans prefer 'black Jesus' then that's fine, whatever. He probably wasn't blond either.

Well, I don't think that's wrong, but it's not something many people on the left will publically say and I think it's fair to criticize public positions as real, even if they are not. Piss Christ isn't officially blasphemous. It's not saying anything bad about Jesus; it's about how people have treated Jesus badly.

No, it's not. It's only purpose was to antagonize Christians, and that story was invented for gaslighting purposes.

The Last Temptation of Christ did not depict Jesus struggling with homosexuality. The book itself was deeply spiritual and I personally found it incredibly moving.

The film was not bad either and had a great soundtrack by Peter Gabriel.

The temptation of the title was a sort of alternate reality where he wed Mary Magdalene after having been deceived by Satan. I recommend the book in particular.

This does not speak to your point but I wanted to make the correction for the sake of accuracy.

Edit: He does not remain in the alternate reality.

A lot of those who are very upset about it, me included, are not democrats.

I think you're using the label "Democrats" to mean "literally anyone I dislike or disagree with".

The democrats defended the film “Last Temptation of Christ” that depicted Christ as struggling with homosexuality

Were Democrats (members of the Democratic party, people involved in fundraising for the party, etc.) defending the film, or just generally left-wing or progressive people? Are the defenders representative of the Democratic party?

they defended an art display that was literally a crucifix in a jar of urine.

This one is peculiar in that:

Serrano [the artist] said of the controversy: "I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ." (...)

On June 23, 2023, Andres Serrano was included among a group of artists invited to meet with Pope Francis in the Sistine Chapel as part of an effort to "broaden out the engagement of the church with artists" and to proclaim the church's commitment to supporting art that serves "to waken us up, call us to a new alertness and a new consciousness" about issues of social justice.[26] During this meeting, the pope blessed Serrano and gave him a thumbs up gesture of approval. Serrano remarked, "I was very happy that the church understands that I am a Christian artist and I am not a blasphemous artist. I’m just an artist."

Is the Pope Catholic Christian?

According to a 2025 poll, 62% of US adults described themselves as Christians. This percentage used to be even higher in the past – you know, when the Democratic party won majorities in elections. A very large proportion of Democratic party voters identify as Christians.

KTO-KEGO

"Who whom" in Polish with the latter misspelled? Do I have this right?

Is the Pope Christian?

The problem with the pope (pick any of the latest ones) is they don't believe in shotgun jesus. When any given statement from the pope could be identical to an internationalist SJ wokie with the numbers filed off it makes me despise everything they stand for.

Your objection is that they're not American nationalists? Do you know what the word "catholic" means?

And I doubt any "internationalist SJ wokie" would agree with their (very strongly held) stance on abortion.

I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ.

Sometimes people here act autistically in all sincerity. I don't believe that Serrano was. Nobody with the least bit of awareness of other people could fail to know that the most obvious interpretation of Jesus in urine is disdain for Jesus, and that it will predictably be seen as saying exactly that. Insisting that that isn't what he meant is a form of trolling. It's like saying "fuck you" and explaining that you merely wished that someone engage in a consensual, pleasurable, act, and why would anyone object to that?

Were Democrats (members of the Democratic party, people involved in fundraising for the party, etc.) defending the film, or just generally left-wing or progressive people? Are the defenders representative of the Democratic party?

Were the people 'defending' the film saying "It is good that it exists.", or were they saying "You don't get to demand that it not exist."?

If this were anyone other than Trump, no one would be talking about it.

If Trump weren't president of the United States no one would be talking about it.

It is certainly no patch on on dijonghazi or tan suitgate, but you expect a certain amount of decorum from your senior leaders that you don't demand from other people. Especially when it comes to mocking your own supporters by substituting yourself for Jesus.

If this were anyone other than Trump, no one would be talking about it.

Really? You sincerely think if another politician posted an image of himself as Jesus Christ no one would be talking about it? My priors on that are very different, to put it mildly.

Obviously democrats don’t care about “blasphemy” (for Christians at any rate), but the only people complaining about it being “blasphemous” that I’ve seen have been Christian sources, most of which are right-leaning. Democrat criticism appears to be on the grounds of delusional narcissism, tastelessness, and/or simple pointing and laughing.

Seems like those making blasphemy allegations are right leaning, or at least strongly Christian.

The democrats reaction more likely stems from the fact that this is a pretty strong instantiation of the idea that Trump has a savior complex and that ‘MAGA is a cult’. Add in the self-own of the leader of the Christian right committing blasphemy, and it makes sense why this is notable.

If this were anyone other than Trump, nobody would be talking about it.

Trump is the president, it’s more notable when he does unusual things. I think it’s safe to say it would have been national news if Biden(‘s staff) or Obama posted a picture of themselves as Jesus.

Also, not to nitpick, but Piss Christ and Passion of the Christ are from 1987 and 1988 respectively. I doubt most democrat (or republican) voters know what Piss Christ is, and probably more than a few have never seen the movie. Just seems odd to call this out as evidence of the democrats ongoing support of blasphemy.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats